DISCLAIMER:

W
This  document  does  not  meet  the
current  format  guidelines  of
IE
the Graduate  School  at    
The  University  of  Texas  at  Austin.  
EV

It  has  been  published  for  

PR

informational  use  only.  

 W
Copyright

by
IE
Ayana Aisha Flewellen

2018
EV
PR
The Dissertation Committee for Ayana Aisha Flewellen Certifies that this is the
approved version of the following Dissertation:

The Clothes on Her Back: Interpreting Sartorial Practices of Self-

Making at the Levi Jordan Plantation

Committee:

W
Maria Franklin, Supervisor
IE
Edmund Gordon
EV

Enrique Rodríguez
PR

James Denbow

Whitney Battle-Baptiste
PR
EV
IE
W
The Clothes on Her Back: Interpreting Sartorial Practices of Self-
Making at the Levi Jordan Plantation

by

Ayana Aisha Flewellen

W
IE Dissertation
Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of
EV
The University of Texas at Austin

in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements
PR

for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

The University of Texas at Austin

May 2018
 ProQuest Number: 28165960

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent on the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

W
IE
EV
ProQuest 28165960

Published by ProQuest LLC ( 2020 ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

All Rights Reserved.

PR

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
 Dedication

To the late Susan Shaw, who birthed Silvia Russell, who birthed Lydia Lilly Russell, who

birthed Susie Ella Armstead, who birthed my great-grandmother, Dovie Lee Tyler. To

these ancestral mothers, who labored in the cotton fields and as domestic servants in Falls

County, Texas, while fashioning themselves lives worth living.

W
IE
EV
PR
 Acknowledgements

It felt a little surreal to write this section. After ten years in college - six of which

were spent in graduate school - it is wild to think that this chapter of my life is now coming

to close. I am in the process of preparing for the afterlife of graduate school.

I am beyond appreciative of Maria Franklin and Whitney Battle-Baptiste for being

unapologetic Black women in the field of archaeology. Their scholarship makes my work

and the work of my peers possible. I am also eternally grateful for Edmund Gordon, who

W
came to my defense with all 250 pages of my dissertation printed with notes in the margins.

Additionally, I am thankful for Enrique Rodríguez Alegría, who spent hours of his time
IE
providing detailed feedback for each chapter I wrote. Finally, I want to thank James

Denbow, whose insightful commentary on my defense will help strengthen this work as it
EV
shifts and transforms in the future.

I want to thank my mother, Dr. Rona Carter. I am possible because of her. I

witnessed my mother make her way through higher education as an adolescent. Watching
PR

her allowed me to see how she carved a path for herself within academia. There was never

a doubt in my mind or hers that I would go to college, and pursue graduate school. It was

because of my mother that I knew finishing graduate school was a possibility. My mother
is my light, my guide, and I am forever grateful for her labor. Thank you for being a

lighthouse Mommie.

I give thanks to my ancestors, those I can name and those who I cannot. The

completion of this work is made possible by my egun who dreamed me into being and

whispered their stories to me in the wind. I gift this work to my descendants, who I hope

will read this text and feel their existence rooted in the hands of women who picked cotton
v
in the fields of Falls County, Texas, who cooked meals in cast iron pots to nourish their

spirit and body, and who ran their fingers through the kink and curls of children's hair

humming hymns of "the ol'days" and "this too shall pass."

I give thanks to my Austin and New Orleans community who held me with love

and compassion. I am thankful for my cousin, Bryana Tillman. She put up with me as a

roommate who always left our kitchen cabinets open and my books scattered in the living

room. I am in gratitude to my aunties Denise Carter, Michelle Carter, and Nicole Carter,

who sent words of encouragement over the years. I am thankful for Sally-Mae Wilborn

Carter and Kathy Murry Flewellen "Bibi," my maternal and paternal grandmothers, who

W
remind me of the fire and water that runs through my blood. To my tribe, Nija White,

Wanjira Murimi, Alisa Valentin, Alicia Odewale, Justin Dunnavant, Soraya Jean-Louis,
IE
and my love, Spirit, I am grateful to call you all my chosen family, and I give thanks to all

of you for making the last six years possible.

EV

I also would like to thank Dr. Kenneth Brown for his years of work at the Levi

Jordan Plantation, and Carol McDavid for her commitment to community-engaged

PR

archaeology, particularly her work with descendant communities at the Levi Jordan

Plantation. Additionally, I am grateful for the Texas Historical Commission, especially

Laura DeNormandie and Jessica Robkin, who provided me access to the Levi Jordan
Plantation artifact assemblage and brought me soy lattes and miniature delicious fruit pies.

Finally, I acknowledge that this work was conjured within a community of "Black

feminist metaphysicians," to pull from Alexis Pauline Gumbs, who are envisioning worlds

of possibility within and outside of academia where black women and our production of

knowledge are valued and treasured.

vi
 Abstract

The Clothes on Her Back: Interpreting Sartorial Practices of Self-

Making at the Levi Jordan Plantation

Ayana Aisha Flewellen, Ph.D.

The University of Texas at Austin, 2018

W
Supervisor: Maria Franklin
IE
In the midst of social reform and the rise of mass produced goods that defined the

late 19th and early 20th centuries, Black women were pinning their hair up with combs,
EV

lacing glass beads around their necks, dyeing coarse-cotton fabric with sumac berries and

walnuts, and fastening buttons to adorn their bodies and dress their social lives. This project
PR

addresses one central question: How did race, gender, and class operations of power and

oppression shape African American women’s identity formation during the late 19th and

early 20th centuries in Texas? This project addresses this question using archaeological and
documentary evidence, by investigating why and how African American women engaged

in particular practices of dress and adornment in Texas from 1865 to 1910. I focus my

research on the clothing, adornment, and grooming artifacts recovered from the Levi

Jordan Plantation (LJP), where African American families lived and labored as tenants,

wage laborers, and sharecroppers. Under the umbrella of my central question, I ask:

vii
1. In what ways were sartorial practices embedded in relations and ideologies of race,

gender, and class, and how did Black women negotiate these operations of power

and oppression through dress?

2. Given the relationship between fashion and the construction of hegemonic notions

of femininity, are Black women’s clothing and adornment practices representative

of resistance and/or conformity to these notions? Is there evidence of formations of

a distinctive Black womanhood?

3. As African American women moved through various spaces (at home, at work, and

in public spaces) during a time of heightened racial oppression, how were their

W
choices regarding dress influenced? In what ways were their sartorial practices

situational to the spaces they occupied?

IE
Through a Black feminist intersectional lens, I attempt to answer these questions

by interpreting the ways practices of dress engaged in by African Americans at the LJP
EV

were shaped by race, gender, and class operations of power and oppression, within spheres

of labor at home and beyond. This work examines how these operations of power and
PR

oppression shaped and were shaped by constructions of Black womanhood - as seen

through sartorial practices – within spheres of labor, as well as through the threat of

racialized and gendered violence, the desire for self-expression, and processes of social
reproduction.

viii
 Table of Contents
List of Tables .................................................................................................................... xii

List of Figures .................................................................................................................. xiv

Chapter 1: Introduction .......................................................................................................1

Research Objectives ....................................................................................................1

Theoretical Framework: Black Feminist Theory and Intersectional Research ...........8

Previous Related Research: Feminist Archaeology and Critical Race Theory

Archaeology ........................................................................................................11

Overview of Terminology ........................................................................................18

W
Overview of Dissertation Chapters ...........................................................................19

Chapter 2: Locating African American Women in the Past and Situating their Dress
IE
Practices .......................................................................................................................20

Locating African American women in U.S. History ................................................21

EV
“Mules and Men:” Black Women’s Labor in Texas .................................................28

“How It Feels To Be Colored Me:” Market Accessibility and the Rise of Mass
Produced Goods in Texas ...................................................................................36
PR

“The Will to Adorn:” Contextualizing African American Dress Practices ..............41

Conclusion ................................................................................................................45

Chapter 3: Levi Jordan Plantation and Ransom and Sarah Williams Farmstead
Project Excavations and Results ..................................................................................47

Archaeological Work Conducted at the Levi Jordan Plantation From 1986 To

Present .................................................................................................................47

Kenneth Brown and the University of Houston Excavations ...................................51

Existing Scholarship on the LJP Site ........................................................................56

Future Plans for the LJP............................................................................................57

Archaeological Excavations and Results from Levi Jordan Plantation ....................57

ix
 Current Analysis of LJP Artifacts .............................................................................60

Artifacts Recovered from The Levi Jordan Plantation Cabins .................................65

The Ransom and Sarah Williams Farmstead Project ................................................70

Remarks ....................................................................................................................75

Chapter 4: Clothing and Adornment Artifacts ..................................................................76

Clothing Fasteners From LJP ...................................................................................79

Hook-and-Eye Closures ..........................................................................................102

Jewelry ....................................................................................................................105

W
Hair Combs and Hair Pins at the LJP .....................................................................119

Clothing and Adornment Data from the LJP Cabins and the Ransom and Sarah
Williams Farmstead ..........................................................................................123
IE
Conclusion ..............................................................................................................132

Chapter 5: The Clothes on Her Back: Interpreting Sartorial Practices of Self-Making

EV
at the Levi Jordan Plantation......................................................................................134

Dress and Labor ......................................................................................................140

Dress and Violence .................................................................................................146

PR

Dress and Self-Expression ......................................................................................152

Dress and Social Reproduction ...............................................................................162

Conclusion ..............................................................................................................170

Chapter 6: Conclusion.....................................................................................................171

Sartorial Practices and Conceptualizations of Resistance and Conformity ............173

Sartorial Practices as Situational.............................................................................174

The Significance of The Study ...............................................................................175

x
Appendix ..........................................................................................................................177

Works Cited .....................................................................................................................181

Vita ...................................................................................................................................205

W
IE
EV
PR

xi
 List of Tables

Table 2.1 The table outlines agricultural and homemaking/domestic tasks requiring

the labor of African American women at the Levi Jordan Plantation.

Based on tasks outlined in Sharpless 1999: 160; Jones 2010; Fox-

Genovese 1988. .............................................................................................32

Table 3.1 TPQs of artifacts used to determine date range of LJP cabins .....................64

Table 3.2 Count of Units per cabin excavated at the LJP Quarters and used for

analysis. .........................................................................................................66

Table 3.3 Total Number of Artifacts by Material, LJP Quarters ..................................68

W
Table 3.4 Profile of cabin I-A-2 in LJP Quarters by functional classification .............69

Table 3.5 Functional Classification Categories for RSWF. Reproduced from Lee
IE
2014...............................................................................................................74

Table 4.1 Artefactual data recovered from within the architectural bounds of the
EV

seven LJP cabins used for this project ..........................................................78

Table 4.2 All clothing fasteners recovered from the LJP Quarters used in this

project ...........................................................................................................82
PR

Table 4.3 Total number of buttons unearthed from seven cabins at LJP by material

type ................................................................................................................85

Table 4.4 Table outlining button measurements and corresponding size

classifications as they relate to clothing type. Peacock (1973);

(Lindbergh 1999); (Sears, Roebuck and Co. 1896) ......................................96

Table 4.5 Table outlining button measurements and corresponding size

classifications at the LJP ...............................................................................97

Table 4.6 Table outlining button color by cabin at the LJP ........................................101

Table 4.7 Table outlining frequency of hook and eye fasteners by cabin at the LJP .104
xii
Table 4.8 Artefactual data classified as jewelry by cabin at the LJP ..........................108

Table 4.9 Table outlining count of Bead type by cabin at the LJP .............................116

Table 4.10 Table outlining Bead color by cabin at the LJP ..........................................118

Table 4.11 Table outlining count of hair comb and hairpin data recovered at LJP by

cabin ............................................................................................................122

Table 4.12 Total Number of Artefactual data recovered from seven LJP Cabins and

the RSWF ....................................................................................................124

Table 4.13 Clothing fasteners recovered at the LJP and the RSWF. ...........................126

Table 4.14 Count of buttons recovered from the LJP by material type .......................128

W
Table 4.15 Count of buttons recovered from the RSWF by material type ...................129

Table 4.16 Total count of Buttons by color at the RSWF.............................................130

Table 4.17
IE
Combs and hairpin Artefactual data recovered from seven cabins at the

LJP and the RSWF ......................................................................................131

EV

Table 4.18 Jewelry artefactual data recovered from the LJP and the RSWF ..............132

Table 5.1. Table outlines total count of decorated and undecorated buttons recovered
PR

at the LJP.....................................................................................................149

Table 5.2 Table outlines the total bead color count at the seven cabins analyzed at

the LJP. .......................................................................................................155

Table 5.3. Table outlines the total button color count at the seven cabins analyzed at

the LJP. .......................................................................................................156

Table 5.4 Table outlines bead shape count total data at the LJP. ..............................158

Table 5.5. Table outlines bead shape by cabin at the LJP. ..............................................159

xiii
 List of Figures

Figure 2.1 Daguerreotype of African American women with two White children.

Description reads “African American nurse with two young children. In

ornamental case.” Curtesy of Cornell University’s Loewentheil

Collection of African-American Photographs ..............................................35

Figure 2.2 Sear, Roebuck and Co 1896 catalog advertisement for their mail order

services ..........................................................................................................38

2012). 49

Figure 3.1 Map of Texas with location of Levi Jordan Plantation (Kenneth Brown

W
2012) .............................................................................................................49

Figure 3.2 Timeline of events at the LJP........................................................................50

IE
Figure 3.3 Map of Structures identified by Kenneth Brown from 1986-2006

(Kenneth Brown 2012) .................................................................................52

EV

Figure 3.4 Map of excavations at Levi Jordan by Kenneth Brown from 1986-2006

(Brown 2012) ................................................................................................55

Figure3.5 Example of 5x5 foot unit and 1x1 subunits used during Brown's
PR

excavations from 1986-2006 (Brown 2012). ................................................59

63

Figure 3.6 TPQs from unites analyzed from cabin blocks 1 and 2 ................................63

Figure 3.7 Location of the Ransom and Sarah Williams Farmstead. Reproduced

from Boyd et al. (2015:2)..............................................................................72

Figure 4.1 Floral Patterned Brass Suspender Buckle. Cabin II-A-1, Lot # 201717,

Unit 990E/1080N, Level 8, Subunit 1 ..........................................................81

xiv
Figure 4.2 Illustration of Button Types recovered at the LJP. A: two-hole fisheye;

B: four-hole, piecrust; C: four-hole, gingham decorative; D: four-hole,

calico decorative; E one-hole bone button; F Victorian Jewel, left: top

view, right: profile view; G: four-hole, dish, Prosser button; H: Glass,

lampwork button with loop-shank; I: two-hole panty waist button.

Illustration created by the author. .................................................................84

Figure 4.3 Prosser utilitarian buttons. Button type from left to right: dish, dish, tire,

pie crust. Lot 00405, Unit 1010E 1095N, Level 4. .......................................87

Figure 4.4 Image of General Service Union button recovered from the LJP. Lot:

W
06327, Unit: 925E/983N, Level 3. Image taken by author. ..........................89

Figure 4.5 Sears, Roebuck and Co. 1895 catalogue listing of “Pearl Shirt Buttons”
IE
with different decorative designs. .................................................................91

Figure 4.6 Image of two molded glass buttons with loop-shank attachments
EV

recovered from the LJP. Right: Lot 04594, Unit 1025E 1095N, Level 8.

Left: Lot 04592, Unit 1025E 1095N, Level 8. Image taken by Author ........92
PR

Figure 4.7 Black molded 2-hole button unearthed at LJP. Lot 00781, Unit 1020E/

1100N, Level 4..............................................................................................99

Figure 4.8 Red rim inkwell, 4-hole Prosser button recovered from LJP. Lot07338,
Unit 920E/985 N, Level 7. ..........................................................................100

Figure 4.9 Advertisement for “Hooks and Eyes” from the 1896 Sears and Roebuck

Spring Catalog ............................................................................................103

Figure 4.10 Five pendant fragments found in enslaved cabins at LJP. Lot 17649,

Unit 915E 995N, Cabin I-A-2. ....................................................................107

Figure 4.11 Listing for “Watches and Jewelry” from the 1875 Montgomery and

Wade Co. Catalog .......................................................................................114

xv
Figure 4.12 Black glass bead unearthed at LJP. Lot 07207, Unit 915E/980N Level

11.................................................................................................................117

Figure 4.13 Image of rubber comb found at LJP. Lot 00774, unit 1020E/1100N,

Level 4. .......................................................................................................120

Figure 4.14 Vulcanized rubber comb roped shaft recovered from the LJP. Lot

004505, Unit 1010E/1095N Level 4 ...........................................................121

Figure 5.1 Stereoscope of African American men, women, and children picking

cotton. The Caption reads Cotton is King, Plantation Scene, Georgia,

U.S.A. Copyright 1895 by Strohmeyer & Wyman Publishers. Curtesy of

W
Cornell University’s Loewentheil Collection of African-American

Photographs.................................................................................................136

Figure 5.2
IE
An early 20th century photograph of Hester Holmes, domestic servant at

the Levi Jordan Plantation ..........................................................................146

EV

Figure 5.3 Stereoscope of African American women, and children in front of a

house. The Caption reads “These are the Generations of Ham.”

PR

Copyright 1895 by Strohmeyer & Wyman Publishers. Curtesy of

Cornell University’s Loewentheil Collection of African-American

Photographs.................................................................................................161
Figure 5.4 A late 19th Black-and-white Still Image of a girl picking cotton with a

gingham print short gown fastened to four-hole buttons, with a white

head scarf [Girl Picking Cotton, MSS1218_B002_I018], Robert

Langmuir African American Photograph Collection, Stuart A. Rose

Manuscript Archives, and Rare Book Library, Emory University. ............163

xvi
Figure 5.5 A late 19th century Gelatin Sliver Print of African American children in

line near a fence. Courtesy of Cornell University’s Loewentheil

Collection of African-American Photographs. ...........................................166

Figure 5.6 Sear, Roebuck and Co. Advertisement 1895 ..............................................168

W
IE
EV
PR

xvii
 Chapter 1: Introduction

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

In the midst of social reform and the rise of mass produced goods that defined the

late 19th and early 20th centuries, Black women were pinning their hair up with combs,

lacing glass beads around their necks, dyeing coarse-cotton fabric with sumac berries and

walnuts, and fastening buttons to adorn their bodies and dress their social lives. This project

addresses one central question: How did race, gender, and class operations of power and

oppression shape African American women’s identity formation during the late 19th and

W
early 20th centuries in Texas? This project addresses this question using archaeological

and documentary evidence, by investigating why African American women engaged in

IE
particular practices of dress and adornment in Texas from 1865 to 1910. I focus my

research on 2,758 clothing, adornment, and grooming artifacts recovered from the Levi
EV

Jordan Plantation (LJP), where African American families lived and labored as tenants,

wage laborers, and sharecroppers. Under the umbrella of my central question, I ask:
PR

1. In what ways were sartorial practices embedded in relations and ideologies of race,

gender, and class, and how did Black women negotiate these operations of power

and oppression through dress?

2. Given the relationship between fashion and the construction of hegemonic notions

of femininity, are Black women’s clothing and adornment practices representative

of resistance and/or conformity to these notions? Is there evidence of formations of

a distinctive Black womanhood?

3. As African American women moved through various spaces (at home, at work, and

in public spaces) during a time of heightened racial oppression, how were their

1
 choices regarding dress influenced? How were their choices of clothing and

adornment situational to the spaces they occupied?

Through a Black feminist intersectional lens, I attempt to answer these questions by

interpreting the ways practices of dress engaged in by African Americans at the LJP were

shaped by race, gender, and class operations of power and oppression within spheres of

labor at home and beyond. This work examines how these operations of power and

oppression shaped and were shaped by constructions of Black womanhood – as seen

through sartorial practices – within spheres of labor, as well as through the threat of

racialized and gendered violence, the desire for self-expression, and processes of social

W
reproduction.

Relatively little archaeological work has focused specifically on African American

IE
lived experiences during the 19th and 20th centuries in Texas, with a few exceptions (Pruitt

2005; Glasrud & Pitre 2008; Winegarten 2010; ongoing work by Franklin). Although there
EV

have been historical studies centered on how African American women have constructed

their identities during enslavement and during the post-emancipation era (Hosbey 2001;
PR

Jones 1985; Riley 1988; Taylor 2003), there are no archaeological projects that have

conducted a gendered analysis of African American sites in Texas. Whitney Battle-Baptiste

(2012:29) writes: "When addressing the lives of African descendant people, a gendered
approach can mean capturing often neglected details and ignored elements of women, men,

and children of the past." By this, she means that a Black feminist critical lens allows for

innovative methodological and theoretical approaches within archaeological investigations

that can capture the multiplicity of African American experiences. Through an application

of Black feminist theory, scholars center the intersections of race, gender, and class to

illuminate complexities within constructions of African American identities in the past.

2
 Scholars have noted that African American women’s dress practices during the

post-emancipation era acted as a testament to their harsh economic situations, centering on

notions of material scarcity and a lack of resources (Jones 1985:25). Other scholars

romanticize Black women’s experiences, centering resistance to hegemonic ideologies of

womanhood and femininity as a principal factor in Black women's choice of dress (Camp

2002: 7). Archaeological research at sites of African enslavement (Brown 1994; Russell

1997; Singleton 2015) and post-emancipation African American sites (Bullen and Bullen

1945:17-28; Mullins 2001; Barnes 2011) challenge narratives of material scarcity with the

unearthing of rich collections of material culture. The creation of representations of late

W
19th and 20th-century Black women through a framework that centers dress practices as

acts of resistance challenges portrayals of material scarcity and economic victimhood that
IE
leave no room for the agency of African American women under the omnipotent structural

oppression of capitalism. However, such notions of resistance usurp discussions regarding

EV

intersecting axes of power and oppression that shape Black life by reifying rigid

conceptualizations of resistance and assimilation (Epperson 1990; Mullins 1990: 18). My

PR

work attempts to provide a more complex analysis of these two frameworks by suggesting

that Black women were neither unconditionally liberated nor pure victims within the

“matrix of domination” (Hill-Collins 2000:18) that shaped their daily lives.

I argue that constructions of Black womanhood – one aspect of which was shaped

by daily sartorial practices of self-making - illuminate the realities of race, gender and class

oppression that Black women faced within spheres of labor in and outside the home. I

conceptualize Black womanhood in this work through an intersectional framework. This

work does not attempt to provide an overarching stagnant or essentializing definition of

what Black womanhood is. Instead, I employ Black womanhood as a constructed identity

that moves fluidly both spatially and temporally. To talk about Black womanhood is to
3
 acknowledge the particularities of African American women’s subjectivities that, like other

identity formations, are constructed in alignment and disjunction to hegemonic ideas of

femininity. I theoretically ground my use of the term “Black womanhood” within the work

of Black women scholars who define the social positionality of African American women

as shaping and shaped by hegemonic notions of womanhood and femininity (Crenshaw

1991; Hill-Collins 2000, 2004). I conceptualize the complexity of African American

women’s social positionality as contradictory, pulling from Toni Morrison’s account of

African American women as “contradiction itself” (Morrison 1992) and Patricia Hill-

Collins’ (2000) theorization of Black women as “outsiders-within.” Both of these

W
frameworks theorize Black woman and their production of Black womanhood as

simultaneously being in alignment with and in disjuncture to hegemonic notions of

IE
womanhood reserved for White middle and upper-class woman. This theoretical

framework allows for fruitful discussions of African American women’s constructions of

EV

identity, and specifically the construction of Black womanhood, as a process of self-

making that “re-inscribes and debunks” (McKittrick 2006) hegemonic racial and gender
PR

ideologies that devalue blackness. This process of re-inscribing and debunking is a process

of recreating and reifying a palimpsest, historically created, which situates Black women

and their formations of womanhood as "contradiction itself."

My use of the term “palimpsest” pulls from the work of Avery Gordon (1997), who

discusses the term in her literary critique of Toni Morrison’s Beloved. Gordon writes that

Morrison’s text acts as a palimpsest, creating a 20th century neo-slave narrative that

“remembers some of what the slave narrative forgot” and, as a result, Morrison’s novel

acts as “a document that has been inscribed several times, where the remnants of earlier,

imperfectly erased scripting is still detectable” (1997:146). With Gordon’s use of the term

palimpsest in mind, I conceptualize sartorial practices as processes of self-making that “re-

4

Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.